Yes, a car this big and powerful can be fun on a narrow, twisty road.

Share this story

This is the 2019 Ferrari Portofino. I'm sorry the pictures aren't great, but I didn't have very long with the car, and driving seemed more important than taking photographs.

Jonathan Gitlin

I think this picture does a good job of highlighting how the side of the Portofino channels air from the front wheels around the sides of the car. Ferrari has learned a lot about air management from its Formula 1 team.

Jonathan Gitlin

The Portofino's cabin is a definite improvement on the California T, the model it replaces.

Jonathan Gitlin

Under the hood there's a 3.9L twin-turbo V8 that Ferrari uses in a number of its cars now. Here, it's mounted behind the front axle, so you don't actually see very much of it. But Ferrari still went to the trouble of painting the intake plenum and the camshaft covers with that crackle red paint.

Jonathan Gitlin

Jonathan Gitlin

It's not a particularly small car, and at nearly 3,700lbs, it's not particularly light either. Which is why it's all the more amazing that the Portofino handles so well on tight, twisty roads...

Jonathan Gitlin

... like this narrow ribbon of road that takes you from Carmel-by-the-Sea out to the inland farms.

Google

Given a bit longer with the car, I imagine I'd find it's as good a GT as it is a sports car.

Jonathan Gitlin

I don't know if you've noticed, but cars keep getting bigger and heavier. There's no mystery to it; safety became a selling point, and airbags and energy-absorbing crash structures take up room and add weight. Naturally, we would expect that power would increase along with mass to prevent next year's model from being slower than this year's, but they're actually getting faster, too.

Consider the Golf GTI. When it launched in 1976, it had 110hp (81kW) and took 9.2 seconds to reach 62mph (100km/h). The 2018 version is exactly twice as powerful (220hp/162kW) and takes just 6.5 seconds to complete the same test.

Further Reading

This trend intensifies as you go up the performance ladder; despite the occasional call for a truce, the arms race continues in full swing. The conventional wisdom—which I myself have peddled on these very pages—is to wonder whether all this progress is actually a good thing. When Formula 1 cars grew too fast for the tracks upon which they raced, the sport moved to new, purpose-built tracks that could contain those speeds. But our roads haven't really changed; if anything, they're usually a lot more crowded than back in the day.

And so, the conventional wisdom goes, something like a Miata is way more suitable for a Sunday morning drive down a twisty road than an exotic with four times the power and six times the price. As is often the case with conventional wisdom, it turns out that's not actually true. One Sunday morning a few weeks ago, while in California, I found myself with the keys to a 2019 Ferrari Portofino and instructions that amounted to "don't bend it and please be back by 1pm."

The Portofino is Ferrari's entry-level car—"entry level" in this case starting at $215,000. It's a front (mid-)engined 2+2 with a folding hard top and a 592hp (441kW) version of Ferrari's F154 3.9L twin-turbo V8. (Other versions of this V8 can be found in the 488 and the GTC4Lusso T.) At 180.6 inches (4,586mm) long, 76.3 inches (1,938mm) wide, and 51.9 inches (1,318mm) tall, it's not particularly diminutive, although at 3,668lbs (1,664kg) it does weigh about 5% less than the model it replaced. It's a bigger car all around than the old Ferrari Daytona, for example, and positively dwarfs something like a Mazda MX-5 RF. Which is what made that particular Sunday morning all the more remarkable.

I didn’t see another car for hours

Further Reading

Somehow, I've become a morning person, and I knew my best chance of getting to know the Portofino sans traffic would be to leave before dawn. But where to go? South on SR1 would be the obvious choice; certainly it would deliver the best pictures. But a friend gave me another idea: head east and keep going until you reach the flat farmlands. So I did.

As locals will no doubt know, the particular ribbon of road I'm talking about (which you can see in the gallery up top) is narrow. So narrow that, in places, there is neither lane divider nor room for two cars to pass each other. It's also twisty, with few straights and plenty of blind turns. It's the sort of road you'd think perfect for a Mazda MX-5 and perfectly unsuitable for the bigger, heavier, much more powerful Portofino. At least, that's what I expected—and I was perfectly wrong.

Ferraris of recent years have been characterized by steering that is both very fast—something like 2.2 turns lock-to-lock—and also very light. And the Portofino's aluminum chassis makes it very stiff, with the two in tandem delivering a car that is far more nimble than it has any right to be. And although the chassis is very stiff, the magnetorheological dampers have a "bumpy road" mode independent of the various other software-defined parameters like the throttle pedal mapping or the seven-speed dual clutch transmission. You can feel road imperfections—of which there are quite a few on California's less-traveled back roads—through the communicative steering. But the dampers will soak up the worst of it so the ride is never close to spine-jarring.

Further Reading

If I'd had some time with the Portofino and a race track, you might now be reading about how the car handles on the limit. I didn't, so the best I can say is that the front tires never ran out of front grip on that particular Sunday morning. The closest I got to lurid power-on oversteer was the occasional shimmy from the rear exiting a slow bend onto a straight.

This could be a daily driver

Similarly, if I'd had more time to live with the Portofino, I could tell you whether it copes with the fast-food drive-thru and if it's possible to make someone sit in the back without amputating their legs. Again, the answers to those questions will have to wait until a later date. (I can say that, when you fold the roof down, it takes up a good deal of the trunk volume.)

Alas, as I mentioned before, my instructions were to deliver said Portofino back to the paddock at Laguna Seca. So on the practicality stakes, I should say that the infotainment system is fine and Apple CarPlay works well. The car is easier to get in and out of than any of the mid-engined entry-level competitors made by Maranello's rivals.

That ease of use definitely plays in Ferrari's favor. Few would consider daily-driving a McLaren 570S, and fewer still will commute in a Lamborghini Huracán. But the Portofino doesn't just offer a front-engined alternative to those exotics; it's also a potential rival for cars that are more grand tourer than out-and-out sports car. Cars like the Bentley Continental or Mercedes-Benz SL, which people can and do drive to work in. Like the Portofino, I'm pretty sure either of those would have been swell for cruising down SR1. But when the road gets narrow and twisty, you're going to want the one with the prancing horse badges.

In times of climate crisis (here in Europe, we just had the hottest July in the history of meteorological measurements, and Greenland is melting right now as we speak), I object against the glorification of cars with internal combustion engines running on fossil fuel. IMHO there is a role here for Ars to take a lead in educating the petrol heads.

In times of climate crisis (here in Europe, we just had the hottest July in the history of meteorological measurements, and Greenland is melting right now as we speak), I object against the glorification of cars with internal combustion engines running on fossil fuel. IMHO there is a role here for Ars to take a lead in educating the petrol heads.

You gotta start somewhere. Let's start here.

Stop. I'm sure there will be a bunch more of evil-ICE pro-EV (mostly Tesla) preaching to come. Let the rest of us who enjoy ICE cars enjoy these articles without the very predictable fussing in the comments.

Given how the lead paragraph sets up the tradeoffs between increased safety equipment, weight (or mass), power and acceleration, I was disappointed that the GTI example then only mentioned differences in power and acceleration but not weight.

Please forgive the minor quibble about a fun to read article. Having had the good fortune to drive a few of them, albeit in much humbler hardware, those California mountain roads are something else.

ETA: Per wikipedia, the Mk1 varied from 1,740 to 2,050 lbs. and the Mk7 comes in ranging from 3,100 to 3,300 lbs.

In times of climate crisis (here in Europe, we just had the hottest July in the history of meteorological measurements, and Greenland is melting right now as we speak), I object against the glorification of cars with internal combustion engines running on fossil fuel. IMHO there is a role here for Ars to take a lead in educating the petrol heads.

You gotta start somewhere. Let's start here.

I can only agree with you.

There is tremendous hypocrisy to discussion about the climate crisis. Those who declare it a crisis (publications and individuals) are often the ones who travel the most by airplane and who glorify gas-guzzling cars, amongst other things.

Let's get off our soapbox and do something about it!

I doubt much fuel will be consumed by these cars vs. an average SUV since they are more likely to be toys rather than daily drivers. How is "glorifying" a Ferrari different that a glowing review of latest model of cell phone when your 4+ year old iPhone should be good enough for you?

You can drive whatever W16 10-litre engine that you wish on weekends and for fun. You are going to do much less damage to the environment than someone taking a SUV up and down for groceries, school and work.

I live in a place where the public transportation system is brilliant and people often drive very nice cars, but kids go to school by tram. Half of my work colleagues don't even have a driver's license.

Ignorance is a disease. In my home country, taking the bus is seen as "for the poor", and car manufacturers take the country hostage. Whenever there's a sign of economic crisis, the government cut taxes otherwise the industry threatens to fire people. We are brainwashed by the media to believe that if you don't have your own brand-new car at age 18 you are a loser.

In times of climate crisis (here in Europe, we just had the hottest July in the history of meteorological measurements, and Greenland is melting right now as we speak), I object against the glorification of cars with internal combustion engines running on fossil fuel. IMHO there is a role here for Ars to take a lead in educating the petrol heads.

You gotta start somewhere. Let's start here.

I can only agree with you.

There is tremendous hypocrisy to discussion about the climate crisis. Those who declare it a crisis (publications and individuals) are often the ones who travel the most by airplane and who glorify gas-guzzling cars, amongst other things.

Let's get off our soapbox and do something about it!

I doubt much fuel will be consumed by these cars vs. an average SUV since they are more likely to be toys rather than daily drivers. How is "glorifying" a Ferrari different that a glowing review of latest model of cell phone when your 4+ year old iPhone should be good enough for you?

I suppose it isn't very different. 🤔

Is this supposed to make me love toy cars or hate the consumer smartphone treadmill?

In times of climate crisis (here in Europe, we just had the hottest July in the history of meteorological measurements, and Greenland is melting right now as we speak), I object against the glorification of cars with internal combustion engines running on fossil fuel. IMHO there is a role here for Ars to take a lead in educating the petrol heads.

You gotta start somewhere. Let's start here.

Petrol heads aren't buying these cars, it's the millionaires that are buying these. We petrol heads are swapping LS engines into anything that fits.

Given how the lead paragraph sets up the tradeoffs between increased safety equipment, weight (or mass), power and acceleration, I was disappointed that the GTI example then only mentioned differences in power and acceleration but not weight.

I was already living in fear of Lee shouting at me for burying the lede so heavily that I didn't want to make that section any longer than it was.

In times of climate crisis (here in Europe, we just had the hottest July in the history of meteorological measurements, and Greenland is melting right now as we speak), I object against the glorification of cars with internal combustion engines running on fossil fuel. IMHO there is a role here for Ars to take a lead in educating the petrol heads.

You gotta start somewhere. Let's start here.

I can only agree with you.

There is tremendous hypocrisy to discussion about the climate crisis. Those who declare it a crisis (publications and individuals) are often the ones who travel the most by airplane and who glorify gas-guzzling cars, amongst other things.

Let's get off our soapbox and do something about it!

I doubt much fuel will be consumed by these cars vs. an average SUV since they are more likely to be toys rather than daily drivers. How is "glorifying" a Ferrari different that a glowing review of latest model of cell phone when your 4+ year old iPhone should be good enough for you?

Even worse, any idea how much energy it costs to make this toy? Someone better use it, or its truly a waste.

That said although I love EV’s and drive one myself, its fine that ars writes about great car engineering everywhere.

Some great articles on variable compression ICE’s is exactly why i come here, its about great engineering and science, whether its electric or not.

I can enjoy reading about these things and the work gone into them, and still not buy them.

For everyone clutching their pearls in dismay at yet another wasteful ICE raping our mother, just relax.I burn more hydrocarbons in a year keeping your local co-op stocked with cruelty-free sustainably grown non-GMO Kohlrabi than this thing will burn in ten.

When Ferrari were selling the California, they managed to get a grand total of two buyers for the manual version, as opposed to thousands for the DCT. You can hardly blame Ferrari for not offering a manual when their buyers simply don't care.

Given how the lead paragraph sets up the tradeoffs between increased safety equipment, weight (or mass), power and acceleration, I was disappointed that the GTI example then only mentioned differences in power and acceleration but not weight.

Please forgive the minor quibble about a fun to read article. Having had the good fortune to drive a few of them, albeit in much humbler hardware, those California mountain roads are something else.

ETA: Per wikipedia, the Mk1 varied from 1,740 to 2,050 lbs. and the Mk7 comes in ranging from 3,100 to 3,100 lbs.

Hmmm ... if they won't let you hammer it around Laguna Seca but can book some time at Buttonwillow, consider doing the transit on Carmel Valley Rd (as you did) then 198 (or back to Salinas then over to Hollister then the back way to New Idria and Los Gatos Road) to Coalinga, then continue on down through true desolation on 33 to the track. Will take all day, even in a Ferrari, or a Miata, or (are you listening Flying Miata?) a Miata with this Ferrari engine, but it's true back roads. And all of them are (more or less) paved, these days.

In times of climate crisis (here in Europe, we just had the hottest July in the history of meteorological measurements, and Greenland is melting right now as we speak), I object against the glorification of cars with internal combustion engines running on fossil fuel. IMHO there is a role here for Ars to take a lead in educating the petrol heads.

You gotta start somewhere. Let's start here.

Look, I couldn't be more distressed about climate change, nor frustrated at humanity's apparent inability to address it. But reviews of enthusiast cars are not where the problem lies.

Put it this way:

The true solution to climate change is adjusting market dynamics to effect large-scale market behavior. Even as a gearhead, I absolutely would like to see the costs of pollution loaded into the price of gasoline as one element of a comprehensive, aggressive, and equitable approach to reducing emissions. If we had that, we could drive the great majority of car purchases to electrics, migrate our infrastructure to sustainable energy, and address the other myriad sources of emission in proper fashion.

But you know what? In that world, I might still choose to be one of the fringe wackos that spends his heard-earned ducats on a car that pollutes more than is strictly necessary and that's okay. And I'd definitely still like to read an article about the latest Ferrari, even if it was even more of a niche product than it is today.

Articles like this are about what some of us enjoy, not about political policy. Focus your well-intentioned energies on the real source of the problem.

I'm pretty sure we'll get an invite for the first drive, but I don't have a date for when that will be.

Looking forward to it. Motor Trend showed up in the mail yesterday and they have it covered, but everything is so watered down in that mag now. The front cover actually splits open into a Supra ad! I much prefer the reviews you do on here. BTW, that's another car I'd like to see you review (Supra). Yeah, I get that it's just a BMW, but I have fond memories of Supra's going way back.

Sorry to go off topic. The Portofino sounds like a fun car, but there's a bunch of cars I'd get before spending $215k+.

I'm pretty sure we'll get an invite for the first drive, but I don't have a date for when that will be.

Looking forward to it. Motor Trend showed up in the mail yesterday and they have it covered, but everything is so watered down in that mag now. The front cover actually splits open into a Supra ad! I much prefer the reviews you do on here. BTW, that's another car I'd like to see you review (Supra). Yeah, I get that it's just a BMW, but I have fond memories of Supra's going way back.

Sorry to go off topic. The Portofino sounds like a fun car, but there's a bunch of cars I'd get before spending $215k+.

There's a bunch of cars you could get at the same time before spending $215+.

I'm pretty sure we'll get an invite for the first drive, but I don't have a date for when that will be.

Looking forward to it. Motor Trend showed up in the mail yesterday and they have it covered, but everything is so watered down in that mag now. The front cover actually splits open into a Supra ad! I much prefer the reviews you do on here. BTW, that's another car I'd like to see you review (Supra). Yeah, I get that it's just a BMW, but I have fond memories of Supra's going way back.

Sorry to go off topic. The Portofino sounds like a fun car, but there's a bunch of cars I'd get before spending $215k+.

There's a bunch of cars you could get at the same time before spending $215+.

That's almost 2 Model S high performance models, or an S and an X, or an S and a 3 with change for adding chargers. 🙀 But I truly like the Ferrari better, and would be more than happy to have it share garage space with a Bolt or the like for running around town and commuting - saving the Ferrari for drives where it matters.

In times of climate crisis (here in Europe, we just had the hottest July in the history of meteorological measurements, and Greenland is melting right now as we speak), I object against the glorification of cars with internal combustion engines running on fossil fuel. IMHO there is a role here for Ars to take a lead in educating the petrol heads.

But when the road gets narrow and twisty, you're going to want the one with the prancing horse badges.

I think this sentence perfectly illustrates what the "EVs or die" folks don't get. Some buy cars for transport, to get from A to B, for them any car is fine. For some, cars are deeper, they grew with a dream car poster, drooled over showrooms; their answer for what would you do when you grow up was: I'll buy a car. Of course an EV can be as fast, convenient, objectively better. But for the generation that's grown up today, the poster had a prancing horse, a bull, wings, a chequered flag... I say, let people enjoy what they love, in the end, dream cars are not going to kill the planet. They are too rare and expensive to be of significance.

In times of climate crisis (here in Europe, we just had the hottest July in the history of meteorological measurements, and Greenland is melting right now as we speak), I object against the glorification of cars with internal combustion engines running on fossil fuel. IMHO there is a role here for Ars to take a lead in educating the petrol heads.

You gotta start somewhere. Let's start here.

I don't need to be educated by some half wit on the internet, thanks. Also, you suck at math if you think this is true.

Now that my emotional reaction is out of the way, let's put two seconds of thought into this. I'm a track rat. Right now I drive an ICE car that is a balance of things, but also fast enough. In daily driving it's pretty average environmentally, and to achieve that it needs to be expensive and slower than it could be.

I'd much prefer to drive a Tesla to work and then have a dedicated ICE car for the weekends. I'm talking maybe 20 miles total mileage in a weekend. Even with straight pipes we're talking a bird fart in a hurricane compared to what the fleet of Camrys is putting out.

But when the road gets narrow and twisty, you're going to want the one with the prancing horse badges.

I think this sentence perfectly illustrates what the "EVs or die" folks don't get. Some buy cars for transport, to get from A to B, for them any car is fine. For some, cars are deeper, they grew with a dream car poster, drooled over showrooms; their answer for what would you do when you grow up was: I'll buy a car. Of course an EV can be as fast, convenient, objectively better. But for the generation that's grown up today, the poster had a prancing horse, a bull, wings, a chequered flag... I say, let people enjoy what they love, in the end, dream cars are not going to kill the planet. They are too rare and expensive to be of significance.

I both have an EV and a Lotus Elise track car. I've done >20k miles on track in the lotus.

I still want a EV. I will not buy another ICE car. The throttle response in the EV is so vastly better it's not even funny, especially true when you compare it to the new turbo cars that always have some lag to them. The lower CG makes EVs feel much more nimble than you would expect.

I keep watching the Porsche Taycan because it's seems to be the first EV that's a real drivers car. Now they just need to build a 2 door version of it.

I wish I had video of when we did laps in a Smart EV at an autocross. It actually handled like an old school 911 because of the heavy rear weight bias and short wheel base. I expected it hate it, but it was actually fun. Honestly I'd say it was more fun than the Audi RS5, or BMW 335i in that setting. Still short of the Lotus though.

What allows that is the centralized weight you can get putting most of the mass between the wheels. Don't fear EVs, go test drive one. Just make sure it's a RWD or AWD, not the FWD econoboxes, and find one on decent tires. Our current EV is so much better after we ditched the low rolling resistance crap tires for proper max-performance summer tires.

As to the sound, turns out it's nice to hear what the tires are doing in the corners.